Milwaukee Police Department proposes trading millions of grounds for free facial recognition access

From development to its application, the facial recognition industry is full of dark practices. But things always get darker. In Milwaukee, police are now considering almost a caricature’s evil deal: 2.5 million handhelds to a private company in exchange for free use of facial recognition software.

On Friday, the Milwaukee Daily Sentinel reported that police officials announced potential agreements at a meeting of the city’s fire and police commission last week. According to media, Milwaukee police have previously borrowed opportunities for facial recognition technology from agencies in neighboring countries. Through the deal, the department will receive two free search licenses, Biometrica, a software company that has already worked with U.S. law enforcement agencies in exchange for photos and prison records spanning decades.

Although the plan for the biological women’s biological program has not been confirmed, it may use them to train its software. Biometrics did not respond to Gizmodo’s request for comment. However, facial recognition is often trained on stolen or borrowed datasets. For example, Clearview AI shaved millions of photos from social media for a database it sold to police, and Pimeyes stole the algorithmic photos of the deceased. The National Institute of Standards and Technology also maintains its own photo database and facial recognition test images of vulnerable people.

Milwaukee police confirmed in an email to Gizmodo that no contract has been signed. The department plans to continue discussions at future city meetings. “Being transparent with the community is the urgency of our service to us.” Even without a firm deal, the proposal alone will sound an alarm.

Facial recognition is well documented inaccuracy in identifying dark skinned people (especially women or non-binary). Not surprisingly, this led to “multiple unlawful arrests due to police reliance on incorrect facial recognition results…and these cases are only known cases,” David Gwidt, spokesman for the American Civil Liberties Union in Wisconsin, told Gizmodo via email. “In almost every instance of it, the person who was wrongly arrested was black.”

However, this is not the only problem with the deal. As of now, the proposed agreement has not yet mentioned notifying individuals, obtaining consent or allowing them to opt out. Like most states, Wisconsin does not have any specific biometric privacy laws. In the rare cases in which it exists, only Illinois extends its regulations beyond commercial use only. The only firm legislation to be mentioned is how to regulate photos. Often, they are public records, and Wisconsin is a state of public records, so arrest records (including photo records) can be made available to the public with limited exceptions.

While all this shows that Milwaukee police do not ask for notification of individuals or obtain consent, it is still sketchy. Let’s ignore how many people don’t want their faces to be used to train surveillance techniques. Facial recognition companies are not affected by security issues such as data breaches. According to Forbes, biometric violations can expose people to identity theft or use to bypass other security systems. It’s not that people can change their faces. This raises the question: Should the Milwaukee police be able to take risks on behalf of others?

The United States has an unprecedented ethics and a history of leveraging marginalized communities, especially advanced technology. Hello Tuskegee. The deal will continue this legacy in a digital environment. As Jeramie Scott, a senior consultant at EPIC, told Gizmodo via email: “Ironically, Milwaukee police are considering providing millions of photos that are likely to be disproportionate to people of color to train surveillance technologies to use them disproportionately.” Additionally, Scott noted that doing so would “exacerbat”[e] Historical racial inequality in the criminal justice system. ”

Comprehensive regulations on facial recognition are unlikely to emerge soon. Although Madison, the capital of Wisconsin, banned the technology in 2020, the state itself does not have it, and Milwaukee does not regulate the police department’s existing surveillance technology. In Scott’s eyes, “the safest thing is not to keep on reaching this deal, and Milwaukee police avoid using the technology, especially if there is no law to strictly limit its use and provide meaningful safeguards.”

Last week, the local ACLU called for Milwaukee to put in a two-year moratorium on any new surveillance technology. It also requires the city to develop regulations for existing regulations while providing community members with opportunities to weigh. Although the Milwaukee Police Department said it will develop a policy to ensure that no one is arrested only, no one can hold them accountable.